I am removing the SAKA from the market.

swingdude said:
Bermy or Fiona is from Bermuda but spends half the year in Tazmania.....no it is a gal from Wales that is living in Oz actually now in NZ...met her in the UK...Kayleigh Naylor...
Click to expand...

Mild derail in progress. Very cool, swingdude! Have you told Kayleigh Naylor about the TreeBuzz forum? I'd love to hear about her adventures working in foreign lands! Maybe you could mention us to her? Thanks!

Tim
 
I own a Velox. It works well. However, from a quick bit of personal research, before owning the Velox, I felt in my mind that the Saka was a superior product, and intended to purchase one. Then I scored a $250 gift card from Treestuff in a contest, and since they only carried the HAAS, I went with it seeing as how it was free. I'm not a competition climber...small differences in performance probably wouldn't affect me significantly. It does a great job.

...but does its company? One is left to wonder. Thankfully, I have zero need for any other weaver products, so voting with my dollar will be pretty easy. I can certainly say I won't ever buy their saddles for my employees. Competition is one thing. Steamrolling is quite another. Sorry for your losses, financial and emotional, Richard.
 
TimBr said:
@treebing; And when you say faster, you mean you get a faster ascent from ground to tree crown, correct? Not that it installs on your body faster, right? Thanks for the clarification.

Also, if what I've said is correct, what do you think accounts for the greater speed in use? The fact that the surgical tubing has a stronger elastic property to it than the bungee cord?

Thanks again, and thanks for posting the link about where to buy the device.

Tim
Click to expand...
yes, if your racing up the tree than this would beat the has a or the sala. its so strong it basically pulls your leg up. speed is not my biggest concern.

just because a product is better doesn't mean it doesn't violate patents. that is something for the USPO to decide. maybe Richard will get his patent and be able to put his product on the market. we can root for that. otherwise we wait a few years and let the process run its course. 8 years left on Michaels patent which is nothing in the scheme of things. To me its clear that nobody would be climbing on a SAKA or a HAAS if it were not for Frankenhauser. I for one certainly am grateful to Frankenhauser for his innovation.
 
Last edited:
I appreciate that Frederich and Francois invented the ring/ring false crotch many years ago but didn't patent the idea. It was given to the profession to use and develop

Along the way the idea was patented in the US

These two stories follow a similar track but few know this story because of a lack of social media at that time in arborculture history

Too bad that innovation was stifled
 
Not to throw cold water but German FreeWorker website wouldn't sell into Canada last I checked, so not sure about them selling direct into the US too (??) and couldn't find the bungeetool thing on HoneyBrothers this morning. Same as some of the Stihl chainsaw protective clothing you can only get if you're in an EEC country it seems. Commercial trivia bugs me no end.
 
yeah that was a shitty move with the ring to rings because it was patented by someone who had nothing to do with the innovation. I don't think this story follows that same track at all because Michael DID come up with the idea himself and rightfully got a patent on his own idea. I dont think patents and protecting patents inherently stifle innovation. open source is a nice concept but not applicable to all situations.

anyone is free to make and sell ring to rings now as that patent has run its course I'm pretty certain.
 
Can we take a second to remember Weaver's callous and self-interested handling of the rollout of their Cougar harness? They equipped the harnesses with breakaway bridges and never issued a recall or admitted they'd done anything wrong.

People were hurt by their defective product, and their response showed they cared more about their bottom line than arborists' safety.

Weaver won't get a cent from me, and I suggest that others don't buy their shitty products if you don't like their shitty behavior.
 
was that weaver or all gear who was responsible for the bridge debacle. I have heard all gear but I don't know all the details.
 
I thought it was Rich who spliced up the original bridges? If memory serves, those were recalled by ABR and then the replacement ones started breaking. Not sure who made those.

Regardless, it was Weaver's product for them to recall. And instead they issued some CYA press release about needing to change the bridge every 6 months, implying that failure was the user's fault, even though some of these bridges broke after only a few weeks of use.

Because these harnesses were never recalled, they were still being sold years after this fiasco. Unconscionable.
 
treebing said:
how many people here give away tree work? ocassionaly I do, but for the most part we all want to get paid for work we do. you should not be angry with someone for not giving away their ideas for free. innovation doesn't happen for free.
Click to expand...

I agree with the right of a patent holder to defend his or her patent. I'm also very glad that you and Paul Cox (@pctree) never got into a sueing match, and allowed each other the room to create great new tools. Among the very best of what is available in the world today. My hat is off to both of you.

Tim
 
tttttt
treebing said:
. . .I dont think patents and protecting patents inherently stifle innovation. . . .
Click to expand...
In theory, no, but the difficulty is that it is not a level playing field. Litigation and patent process is very expensive and thus stacked heavily in favour of whoever has the bucks, that is usually the larger companies. There is considerable abuse of the system by these big guys, including outright theft of ideas, etc. A patent carries no enforcement assistance from the government in this country; the entire burden is on the patent holder to defend it and/or pursue any litigation or patent searches related to it. And of course the bloody lawyers make sure everything costs a mint and for them it is win/win. They don't even care who wins or loses; they get theirs either way. So in a real sense, this is a powerful discouragement to innovation and invention, as we are indeed presently witnesses with Richard having to withdraw his wonderful SAKA.
 
First of all I'm just really tired of this fight and having to defend myself and I don't know why I keep doing it, except that now I'm fighting to try to stay in business, that being said:

I have said in written form, and here now, I too am appreciative of the innovation Michael made to the Jerry Beranek's rope walker. Unfortunately I have a mind, it seems, that sees ways of improvement, that is the very nature of innovation done by many. The Drum for the Unicender and the Hump for the Rope Runner are a couple of examples. I have offered those to the makers free without restriction. I understand when they're met with resistance or the value is not perceived or there. Now would I make and sell a Unicender or a Rope Runner with just those modifications, clearly it would be a violation in my mind.

So let me explain a little of my understanding of patents now that I have become intimately aware. I am not a patent examiner nor a patent attorney of course. A patent is an expensive document filed that contains many sections such as background, summary of the invention, description of fancy drawings and such, then it has the claims. This is the real meat and potatoes of that application. Let's say there are 20 claims made in that application, 18 of which draw from pre-existing art such as other rope walkers and how it is made from materials like rope. Now suppose the first two are very specific, such as using a bungee in a SRT configuration with a single fixed end and an opposite free end. And perhaps the next is how you are running that INSIDE of that rope and load-bearing member that supports the weight of the climber. The innovator has clearly laid out what is being added and what is considered the intilecualal property and contribution. I think most of you being climbers understand the significance and the difference between climbing SRT and DRT or DmRT, or the significance of climbing up a rope or climbing up a piece of webbing. I think I've made my point well enough, and yes I am tired of fighting this and I will let the patent application run its course. Yes the SAKA is off the market, it would be nice to just be able to move forward.

I'll repost a video, like always it's too long but at the very end + there is some demonstration. Understanding concept and how things work is import.

JB and MF.webp
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New threads New posts

Kask Stihl NORTHEASTERN Arborists Wesspur TreeStuff.com Teufelberger Westminster X-Rigging Teufelberger
Back
Top Bottom